On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 01:35:57AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 07:44:52PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > > Yes, we discussed exactly this, which is why I'm surprised you went > > ahead with the same approach. I told you I don't like tree wide renames, > > if they can be avoided. I'd rather suffer some pain wrt page vs segments > > naming, and then later do a rename (if it bothers us) once the dust has > > settled on the interesting part of the changes. > > > > I'm very well away of our current naming and what it signifies. With > > #1, you are really splitting hairs, imho. Find a decent name for > > multiple segment. Chunk? > > vec? > > bio_for_each_segment (page) > bio_for_each_vec (whole bvec) IMO, either vec or chunk should be fine, but one thing is that there isn't obvious difference between segment and vec/chunk, especially the difference is much less obvious than between page and vec/chunk/segment. That is why I tried to suggest to introduce bio_for_each_page_* before. Thanks, Ming
